| Revision as of 10:10, 5 April 2004 editWilliamb (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers12,220 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:37, 30 May 2004 edit undo62.64.236.217 (talk) AppallingNext edit → | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| Nearly only negatives claims in this article. Should be titled "Criticism against blabla". But has a pure criticist article a place in Misplaced Pages? ] 14:45, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC) | Nearly only negatives claims in this article. Should be titled "Criticism against blabla". But has a pure criticist article a place in Misplaced Pages? ] 14:45, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC) | ||
| == Appalling == | |||
| I can't believe this article, which seems to consist mostly of unattributed and unproven claims, most of which are incredible and beyond belief. | |||
| Claims are made that the Missionaries of Charity were observed (and supposedly audited) doing things that amount it is claimed to fraud, ten years ago in the USA and United Kingdom. So where are the charges from the appropriate authorities? Where is the official investigation which should have ensued? The lack of both seems a clear indication that these charges are malicious and bogus. | |||
| The allegations headlined "torture" lower down, are even more incredible and seem to me to be libelous, and based on the sole "testimony" and guesswork of one supposed (hindu) priest ten years ago. Why is this given any room at all? Once again if this "charge " was known to the Indian authorities ten years ago, where is the action, where the prosecutions? How come Mother Teresa was given a State funeral with thousands lining the streets to mourn the passing of this "torturer"? Quite obviously this is just another malicious slur. | |||
Revision as of 02:37, 30 May 2004
None of the claims in this part of the article are actually backed up with anything but heresay. They don't belong in an encyclopedia.
The following has been added: Note: Former sections headed Criticism and Misuse of funds have been suppressed. Is there any doubt as to the accuracy of this prefatory note? Any complaint about the accuracy of 'suppressed' in this instance? Wetman 00:06, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- How can it be called "suppressed", when, according to the edit history, the text in question was added then later deleted (presumably because it is currently back in the Mother Teresa article) by the same person (Alexandros, aka Aplank)? Harris7 03:50, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Nearly only negatives claims in this article. Should be titled "Criticism against blabla". But has a pure criticist article a place in Misplaced Pages? gbog 14:45, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Appalling
I can't believe this article, which seems to consist mostly of unattributed and unproven claims, most of which are incredible and beyond belief.
Claims are made that the Missionaries of Charity were observed (and supposedly audited) doing things that amount it is claimed to fraud, ten years ago in the USA and United Kingdom. So where are the charges from the appropriate authorities? Where is the official investigation which should have ensued? The lack of both seems a clear indication that these charges are malicious and bogus.
The allegations headlined "torture" lower down, are even more incredible and seem to me to be libelous, and based on the sole "testimony" and guesswork of one supposed (hindu) priest ten years ago. Why is this given any room at all? Once again if this "charge " was known to the Indian authorities ten years ago, where is the action, where the prosecutions? How come Mother Teresa was given a State funeral with thousands lining the streets to mourn the passing of this "torturer"? Quite obviously this is just another malicious slur.